You see, many days we pick her up in our car because our days are so full and fast. Right now, however, I’m on paternity leave for the birth of Aderyn’s baby brother Rohan so I’m helping out with everything around the house, including getting Aderyn to and from school. One of the reasons we chose to live where we do is precisely because it is a “very walkable” neighborhood with a walkscore of 71. Add to this all the recent attention to how sitting is killing us and I thought it would be a good practice for me to walk to pick up my daughter, and of course, there are the environmental benefits and cost savings of not driving.

Aderyn didn’t really expect to walk home; she merely had her shoes on and wasn’t prepared for an adventure going home. As soon as her boots were on, her feet were climbing up the snow pile, and after only a few minutes of conquering it, she wanted to slide down on her bottom to get back on the ground. Sadly for her, school clothes aren’t conducive to sliding down snow piles.

As quickly as the pile invited her to climb it, a large empty lot full of melting snow invited her to run through it, picking up snow on the way, which ended up as broken snowballs on and in my coat.

snowy walks = an adventure waiting to happen

Really, who would have imagined walking home would lead to so many adventures? Trekking through the vacant lot allowed us to pass through a friendly neighbor’s yard as a shortcut where Aderyn picked up a two-inch piece of ice the size of a cookie sheet! No surprise it didn’t last long before she smashed it on the sidewalk to see all the pieces it broke into.

Back on the sidewalk the name of the game was “throw snowballs at daddy” again, which was really quite fun as I dodged, ducked, and got hit with snowballs. The game was only interrupted long enough to splash in puddles along the way.

Next, we made our mark in the snow on top of a short retaining wall where we guided our gloved hands through the snow, knocking plenty off in the process. We soon turned down the big hill by our house where Aderyn’s imagination ran as fast as someone sledding down the hill. In fact, she began to imagine how fun it would be to sled down the 2 1/2-block hill on the snow-packed sidewalk, of course only to magically stop before crossing into the street. When I pointed out how hard it would be to stop a sled moving at that speed, she thought a hill as high as the trees might do the trick to slow us down. And once we would be stopped at the top of this hill-as-high-as-the-trees, we could start over by sledding down the backside of the giant snow hill.

By the time we figured all this out we were feeling even more adventurous so we cut through an old abandoned alley to get to our house from the backyard. All of this made me feel like our journey home from school was just like the kids’ dashed trail in Family Circus comics.

The point is, none of this would have happened had we driven home. Not to mention it was the slow pace that created enough space in my mind to be so present to Aderyn, especially when she asked if we could go sledding. Luckily for me, I had the presence enough to say yes. However, the sledding, getting “air-time”, and pulling daddy down the hill stories will have to wait for another time.

Needless to say whenever I walk up to get her after school her first question is now, “Did you walk?” quickly followed by, “Let’s have an adventure!”

Where did you walk today?

What adventures do you make time for in your day?

Internally we’ve been talking about when and how we discuss climate change with our clients, partners and collaborators. We have always been very careful when bringing it up because we fear doing so will immediately alienate the “disbelievers.” I think it’s time we start talking about it. First, a little background on why I’m a little fired up about it. Over the weekend I watched a film and read several articles that put me in a bit of a tizzy.

Chasing Ice
First, on Friday night a few Verdisians and I took in the film Chasing Ice. It’s a documentary following photographer James Balog’s quest to document the rapid decline in glacial ice. As he put it in the film, glacial retreat is the canary in the coal mine when it comes to climate change. The film did a wonderful job of showing the eye-opening loss of glacial ice while being absolutely beautiful thanks to Balog’s stunning photography.

Chasing Ice really reached a crescendo for me when a few of Balog’s colleagues witnessed the largest calving event ever recorded on tape. Glacial ice roughly the size of Manhattan broke away from the main Ilulissat Glacier for 75 minutes, a portion of which was shown in the film and can be viewed in the clip above. It was absolutely jaw-dropping to see. If you haven’t seen the film yet, it’s worth seeing in the theatre (now playing at Film Streams!).

National Climate Assessment & More
When I awoke Saturday morning, there were three articles on the back page of the Omaha World Herald all covering climate change; two of which summarized findings from the National Climate Assessment (NCA) draft report. The first article focused on what’s been happening in the Great Plains and highlighted the crazy weather we experienced in 2011 as a perfect case-in-point for what we should expect going forward (of particular note: $12 billion in damages due to the extreme weather).

The second article summarized national trends and specifically mentioned the NCA’s finding that ”warming of the planet is changing daily American life“. The report, which is a mere 1,100+ pages, cuts right to the chase and identifies the kinds of changes we should expect, region-by-region, and warns of the disruptions our society will likely experience as temperatures rise. While it’s not as epic as Waterworld predicts, the prognostications are a little scary.

The third article donning the back page of my Herald originally ran in the New York Times on January 10. Its focus was 2012′s worldwide weather and it noted that extreme weather is now the norm. Several extreme and highly abnormal weather events from all over the globe were cited. As was illuminated in the Times article, extreme weather is not uncommon, but the sheer number of extreme events that occurred in 2012 is what’s abnormal.

Where Do We Go From Here
Fortunately, many businesses are responding, which is becoming clearer every time a major consulting firm produces a sustainability-focused report. One indicator: more than 80% of the Global 500 responded to the Climate Disclosure Project’s 2011 request for carbon disclosure (PwC: Do Investors care about sustainability?). Additional good news is that those companies that are actually taking meaningful steps are often out-performing their competitors (MIT Sloan Management Review: Sustainability: The ‘Embracers’ Seize Advantage). 

Despite the clear evidence that 1) we are facing widespread institutional risk to all of our known systems due to climate change, and 2) implementing meaningful sustainable change is good for the bottom line, we still find that adoption of sustainable principles can still be a tough sell. Why? IBM’s recent report suggests that executive involvement and support is critical to success. We couldn’t agree more. Without the leader on board, it’s not worth doing, which is sad but true. Leaderless sustainability initiatives often struggle and face insurmountable challenges when attempting to make progress.

I think there’s more at play, though. The term climate change has become so politically polarized that some leaders will stop listening if it’s even mentioned, which means that when it comes time for them to understand the risks they face and the benefits they’re missing, they’ve already tuned out. It’s for this reason that we rarely talked about climate change in the past, choosing instead to focus on the more tangible benefits of sustainability initiatives: saving money, happier employees, healthier work environments, and more loyal customers.

It’s no longer enough. It’s time for us to start talking about the risks that organizations face as well. It’s not going to be easy, but if we’re going to do our job and do it well, they must be knowledgeable of and prepared to respond to the challenges that climate change is going to bring. These aren’t scare tactics; it’s reality. And if we aren’t prepared and helping our clients prepare, we aren’t doing our job.

Onward and upward.

Over the weekend the Omaha World Herald published a story summarizing the struggle and conclusion of one South Shore Heights (SSH) resident’s attempt to have solar panels on his home. Resident Tim Adams installed the panels on his roof in 2010 and has been battling the SSH Homeowners Association (HOA) ever since. The two sides recently settled a lawsuit (prompting the OWH story) and Adams agreed to remove the panels by July 1. I want to summarize the arguments on both sides and then add my own two cents.

Tim Adams’ Argument

Mr. Adams created a website to tell his side of the story and to “educate Omaha homeowners about solar power and the lawsuit” with SSH. His primary argument is that solar panels are not prohibited by any language in the SSH covenants. Moreover, Mr. Adams argues the HOA board has for years failed to follow protocols in the covenants for approval of external improvements and has been inconsistent in approving certain improvements.

A view of the rear of Mr. Adams house in South Shore Heights.

The HOA’s Argument

In challenging Mr. Adams’ solar panels, the HOA board relied upon covenant language requiring external improvements to conform to the “look, feel and style” of the neighborhood. The board argued that allowing solar panels on Mr. Adams’ house would reduce property values and make it more difficult to sell the home, in addition to being ugly.

My Perspective

Even though the HOA was on the winning side, I think the HOA was on the wrong side.  The evidence that global warming is already happening is growing, and even though Nebraska won’t disappear due to sea level rise—unlike many island nations—Nebraskans should start preparing for more frequent and severe drought, more wildfires, and changes to wildlife and insect inhabitants as climate change impacts the midwest. (What do you think these impacts will do to our agricultural economy?) Our past burning of fossil fuels and the associated emissions are starting to catch up with us. The future costs of the impact of climate change are going to make the supposed aesthetic concerns of the SSH HOA insignificant. The SSH HOA seems out of touch with the causes and effects of climate change.*

Climate change is likely to increase the frequency and severity of drought in the midwest, meaning that reservoir lakes such as Lake Zorinsky near South Shore Heights, will eventually disappear as water supplies decrease.

Although I do not know if the SSH HOA has challenged other exterior improvements in the neighborhood, other HOAs around the country have fought with homeowners over such frivolous items as holiday decorations, yard signs, types of pets, use of clotheslines for drying clothes, and allowable flora and fauna. There have also been other HOA challenges related to more significant items like the on-site use of renewable energy for a home. As a society we need to get past the point where aesthetics and short-term economic concerns prevent one individual from making a decision to reduce his family’s contribution to climate change by investing in solar energy.

I suspect that Mr. Adams thoroughly educated his neighbors on the financial case for on-site renewable energy and the environmental benefits of preventing climate change. However, I wonder if he mentioned the more immediate impacts of pollution from OPPD’s coal- and natural gas-based electricity generation, and the immediate health benefits to everyone in the Omaha region from reducing the emissions from nearby power plants. These emissions are directly tied to respiratory irritation across the population but especially in the very young and very old, linked to asthma and bronchitis, send mercury into the atmosphere and environment, and emit gases that lead to acid rain.

Selection Bias In Action

Regardless of the SSH HOA’s right to exercise its authority pertaining to the “look, feel and style” of the neighborhood, I think that Mr. Adams was right not to back down right away. The HOA may not have fully considered the practical value—as opposed to any aesthetic value—of the panels, because it appears the board members were likely making decisions using selective bias. Selective bias is a human tendency to perceive information that reinforces preexisting beliefs while ignoring information that challenges existing beliefs. In such cases, convincing others to act on information alone is quite difficult. Instead, those individuals need to come to the conclusion on their own either through their own experience or over time. It seems the SSH HOA already has a bias against renewable energy regardless of its practical value, and did not truly consider or weigh that value against any preexisting biases.

The settlement between the parties reinforces the apparent presence of selective bias. In addition to restricting Mr. Adams from taking future legal action or filing complaints against the HOA, the settlement does not allow him to make any future public comments about the case or the HOA and its members, whether on Facebook, his website, or other media. Although I don’t agree, I can understand the settlement requiring removal of the panels and preventing future legal action, but the restraint on Mr. Adams’ speech seems only to underscore the HOA’s bias in this situation. The HOA was able to block Mr. Adams from using renewable energy on his home, but why should he also be restricted from making future comments about the case? The answer is that it reinforces the HOA’s apparent bias against on-site renewables: The HOA had an opportunity to remove a voice from the table that it didn’t agree with by imposing this bias on Mr. Adams’ would-be audience. In other words, the HOA appears to have shifted from the internal bias of “I don’t care what you have to say and I’m not listening,” to the external “Because I don’t want to hear what you have to say, I won’t allow you to say it to anyone else either.”

Conclusion

By filing for a court injunction to force Mr. Adams to remove his panels, the SSH HOA could have set a very damaging precedent to the future use of private renewable energy generation in the Omaha area. Even though it is disappointing that the HOA ultimately achieved its objective to remove the panels, it is better that it occurred through a private settlement rather than a court decision. The next time an HOA threatens renewable energy on a private home in Omaha, I hope Omaha residents can galvanize support for city-wide changes that ensure any homeowner can take action to his or her carbon footprint by investing in private, on-site renewable energy generation. Nebraska’s net metering statutes presumes that residents have the ability take such action, and allowing distributed generation increases the security and reliability of our electricity grid by spreading out the generation and reducing the need for transmission, in addition to mitigating climate change.

__________

*The South Shore Heights website “about” page states that SSH is “situated within a quarter mile” of Lake Zorinsky, and features a panoramic image of the lake. The implication is that the neighborhood derives value from its proximity to a natural place, and I am sure that is true. However, there is a disconnect because Mr. Adams solar panels would reduce greenhouse gas emissions, which is an action that mitigates climate change, and thereby helps preserve natural places as we now know them. Without greater action to mitigate climate change, scientists predict more frequent and severe drought in the midwest, which has the potential to perpetually dry up reservoir lakes such as Lake Zorinsky as water resources become more scarce.

The Moody family was down to one car today so I no longer had the option to comfortably hop into my car and drive in. About 8:00 last night, I started mulling options: I checked in with Patrick and Chris, both of which live nearby, to see if carpooling was an option (it was). I confirmed the bus schedule (still running…as always), and took a look at the weather to see if it was going to be amenable to biking (cold and snowy).

Research in hand, I gave myself until 7:30am this morning to decide. At 7:25am I turned down a carpool ride and left the house (on the Linus) planning to hop on the #11. As I climbed the hill towards the bus stop I found myself enjoying the time spent on the bike and decided to press on and just bike all the way in.

The Trusty Linus

The reason I was on two wheels was, in part, because I didn’t have the choice to drive alone in my car; I was pushed out. On the other hand, I was being pulled onto my bike; that is, I wanted to ride. The feeling of having the cold, snowy air whipping my face felt the same as it did when I was eleven years old flying down a snow-packed hill on a sled. It was fun and exhilarating, and a little dangerous yet perfectly comfortable.

Progressive companies that are motivated to have their employees (and maybe even their clients…gasp!) mobilize in non-traditional ways have the same two-pronged bevy of alternatives. That is they can push their folks out of their cars AND pull them into other options.

Pushing Them Out
Providing disincentives to driving alone is a touchy subject. Ninety six percent of Omahans commute to/from work alone in their cars so it’s quite the challenge when companies start enacting policies or programs that actively dissuade people from doing so. The most popular and easiest-to-implement method is increasing the amount of money people pay to park their car. But it’s effective. It hits them where it hurts the most – in the pocketbook – and it will move the needle. When pushing people out of their cars, however, it’s vital to give them other options…to pull them in.

Pulling Them In
Actively enticing employees to carpool, or hop on the bus or bike is a much more enjoyable endeavor with many opportunities for creative programs and policies. There are many options to consider, so we always recommend an extremely simple approach…ask employees what they do and don’t want. A straightforward survey will reveal current commuting patterns, barriers to new alternatives, and how likely and willing people will be to participate in new programs.

As part of that survey, it’s important to offer possible programs that you might actually consider implementing should you find adequate interest. In other words, don’t mention a subsidized bus pass program unless you’re prepared to actually institute the program. But the survey should get to the bottom of what people might get excited about. Are they more likely to be bikers than bussers? Do they know where and when busses run? Have they ever considered carpooling? Is their biggest fear being “stuck” at work because they missed the bus or their carpool ride home? Do they even own bikes?

Once you know more about what people do and don’t want, it’s number-crunching time. Model out possible changes in your company commuting patterns so as to determine if you can avoid constructing a new surface-parking lot, for example. Once you have a sense for what might work, consider a pilot. There’s not always a need to walk through the halls dropping bus passes on every desk. Start simple, learn a few things, and then expand.

Transitioning from a workforce that predominantly drives alone to one that is migrating towards more sustainable alternatives is not easy. People are creatures of habit, and they’ll always take the path of least resistance unless you intervene in some way. But that intervention needs to both push them out of their cars and pull them towards other options. Work it from both angles and you’ll have far more success…and happier employees as well.

Onward and upward.

The connection to sustainability is obviously that healthier, happier employees have a much more positive impact on the company, and by encouraging frequent short breaks, the company is also more attractive to employees. This bolsters both the “people” and “prosperity” legs of the three-legged sustainability stool. It is a simple easy way for employers to incorporate sustainability into their corporate culture.

The transition into and out of a vacation can be tough. For me, it’s always been more difficult on the front-end, and it took me a few days last week to get into my vacation zone. My wife, daughter and I were lucky enough to spend five amazing nights on Star Island, which lies neatly in Minnesota’s Cass Lake. The majority of the island is in Chippewa National Forest, which means the 980 acre island is rigidly managed and remains a nature-centric place with no vehicles, many historic cabins, and wildlife galore.

I couldn’t have asked for a better place to unwind and re-energize. We’ve always preferred vacations where we are immersed in nature and Star Island was no different. Awaking to the sound of a loon call is far superior to the iPhone vibration I’m used to. My morning cup of coffee was better while strolling with the little one along the trails outside the cabin. And I never felt more relaxed than when I was quietly swimming alone in Cass Lake while turtles climbed along the shore and bald eagles flew overhead. Jealous? You should be. It was great!

LL "hiking" amidst the white pines on Star Island.

While I always knew that nature had a restorative power, I’m learning more about the science behind it. Last week I started Richard Louv’s latest book, The Nature Principle. Louv is author of the national bestseller Last Child in the Woods and has been a leader in helping to define and draw awareness to “nature deficit disorder.” In a nutshell, Louv draws strong, direct connections between access to nature and human health (physical, mental and spiritual).

Although I only managed to get about halfway through the book (I preferred to sit back and enjoy nature rather than reading about how I should be doing just that), the connection between humans and nature is already abundantly clear. We are far better off when we have regular access to the natural world. That doesn’t mean we need to live in a national forest, though. It need not be that intense. But it does need to be present in some way.

Now that I’m back at my desk, I’m kicking around ideas to get our clients and Team Verdis out into nature more. Student performance improves with increased access to nature. Patients recover quicker. Employees are more productive. Yet it’s often easier said than done. For our part, we’re going to start having meetings somewhere other than in a conference room. Although that’s going to have to wait a few days until this nasty hot spell passes through Omaha.

Onward and upward.

Note: If you’re interested in learning more about Star Island, check out Star Island: A Minnesota Summer Community available in paperback. I haven’t read it yet but my curiosity about the island’s history and what will happen going forward has been piqued. It’s a very unique place to say the least.

Like Craig, I also regularly commute to work by bicycle only, bicycling to the bus, carpooling, and occasionally driving alone. I also have been actively participating in both the Activate Omaha Bicycle Commuter Challenge and the Metro [bus and carpooling] Commuter Challenge. Even though both challenges provide easy, web-based systems to track your commutes, I forget to enter data some days and have to go back. However, I continue to participate because I have no problem being possibly rewarded for something I am doing anyway. I should also add that I like to keep track of data so I can analyze things later; the challenge tools allow me to do that in a more social way.

In fact, along the lines of Craig’s suggestion, I do track the miles driven and gasoline consumed in the car my wife and I share. I’ve been tracking these things since 2003. Even though I use a pen and notebook, it is actually easier than ever to do with apps available for nearly every model of smart phone.

Granted, I may not be the intended audience or target market for these challenges, but since I regularly use multiple modes anyway, I welcome the extra encouragement. Perhaps the real question is whether the main purpose is to reward current users or attract new users (or both)? If the former, the challenges are fulfilling their purpose (unless you are like Craig and feel like you are being punished). If the latter, the challenges may be too onerous. Someone who chooses to use drive alone each day (for whatever reason) may not be willing to tackle the double “challenge” of both switching their commuting habit and, oh my gosh, keep track of their use.

I personally have no mixed feelings about participating in the challenges, and at least in the case of the bicycle commuting challenge, believe I am helping meet a third purpose that is critical to Omaha’s community development: I am helping create a body of data that demonstrate support for what are currently alternative modes of transportation. For me that is the most important outcome and supersedes any qualms I could have about logging my trips, or concerns about whether the challenges are actually reducing single-occupancy vehicle use. So I am happy to participate. Like the old Tums commercials said about the calcium content of the chalky antacid, “It’s something my body needs anyway,” these challenges are good for the community even if they aren’t getting people out of cars. On the other hand, sometimes my coworkers say I am nuts.

—————————

*I have to qualify “cool” because, as a side note, Craig and I are diametrically opposed on the issue of whether the serial, or Oxford, comma is appropriate to use. I dig it, he say “not cool.” But I am not shocked that more people support it than not as shown by the results of our Facebook and in-house polls:

The first day was very much intended to build some rapport amongst attendees (there are just over 40) and establish a foundation for the discussions that will be held on days two and three. One of the first things that struck me about my fellow attendees is that they are all so intensely passionate and excited about the work they’re doing. It was inspiring to hear all of the achievements that many schools and school districts have accomplished, and I’m looking forward to getting into the weeds on a few projects that piqued my interest (students doing energy audits, revolving loan funds, city-wide coalitions, etc.).

We went through an exercise where each attendee wrote two achievements, two visions, and two barriers on post-it notes and then stuck them on the wall. Once organized into categories, a brief discussion ensued where people offered observations. The crux of our conversation was actually focused around the idea of culture change and how to move a school district towards a culture that embraces sustainability.

The Post-It Note Exercise Outcome

It’s not much of a surprise, at least in my mind, that so many were having such a difficult time getting it done. It’s hard and complicated. In my view, there are a few keys to making it happen:

1. Leadership Commitment. It’s a must and if it’s not there, having a meaningful sustainability program is immensely difficult. Success may occur in the short-run, but in the long-term it will likely fizzle.
2. Tie Sustainability to Student Achievement. Let’s not kid ourselves, school administrators, teachers, staff and students are (or should be) primarily focused on one thing: student achievement. In order to have a successful green schools initiative, everything happening must lead towards, at least in some way, student achievement. I appreciated the fact that Rachel Gutter, Director of the the USGBC’s Center for Green Schools, offered this issue in her introductory remarks. We have anecdotal stories, but we need unequivocal data that makes the connection.
3. Quick & Measurable Wins. Several attendees suggested that their initial efforts were somewhat covert in that they didn’t necessarily ask for permission from senior leadership. They identified and pursued an opportunity, achieved success, and then leveraged it to earn a commitment from leadership and others. It’s a good strategy, but the key is not only achieving the win, but measuring it so that it is easier to “make the case” when the time comes.

All in all it was a really good start to what I’m sure will be a great few days. I already have a healthy list of ideas to bring back to Omaha, yet we’ve only been together for half a day. Hopefully my head doesn’t explode before the remaining two days conclude…although if it does, I think it would be a good sign.

His comments on Wednesday were based on his most recent book, The Coming Jobs War, an exploration of how every countries’ ability to create jobs and grow their economy directly affects the success of their nation in many other metrics. While I’ve not read the book (yet), Clifton provided a great overview of the issue and touched on what business and government leaders should be doing to win the jobs war. I’m an economics geek, so I found it fascinating. Let’s explore a bit further, shall we.

AN OVERVIEW OF THE JOBS WAR FUNDAMENTALS

Priority #1: A Good Job
First, it’s important to understand just how important jobs are not only for Americans but for all the world’s inhabitants. Several decades ago, Gallup polling found that most Americans’ top priorities were peace and family, which makes perfect sense given that we were fresh out of WWII. But a major shift has occurred in our top priority: it’s now having a good job. This changes everything, Clifton explained, because nearly every big decision people make is impacted by their desire to have a good job. How many kids to have, where to live, when to get married, etc. And it also impacts how business leaders manage their employees because people are now defined by their job.

The shift in priorities is not unique to the U.S. Gallup found that of the world’s 5 billion adults, 3 billion said their primary desire in life is a good job, yet there are only 1.2 billion jobs in the world. Again, at the global level, this is huge. It alters geopolitical strategies. It increases tension in nearly every country, especially those that are a bit unstable. Clifton explained that the last several decades have seen about two revolutions per year. We’re blowing that average out of the water these days (Arab Spring, anyone?).

The United States as the (current) world economic leader
The next important element to keep in mind is the United States’ position in the world economy hierarchy. We are head and shoulders above everyone. It’s not even close. Our GDP is around 15 trillion. China’s is 5 trillion. Our military spending alone is about the same as Russia’s entire GDP. This affords us the ability to basically run the show. Economic dominance, Clifton said, equates to world dominance. And he’s right. Every country wants to do business with us. If they upset us, we drop a few economic sanctions (or just the threat of economic sanctions) on them, and we get what want. Lickity split. In other words, it’s really, really important that we maintain our position as the world’s economic leader.

But that’s not so easy, and many economists are predicting that in thirty years, China will overtake us. That spells trouble. The remainder of Clifton’s comments focused on what business and government leaders should be doing to ensure that the U.S. maintains its position as the world’s economic leader (as measured by GDP). The long and short of it is: 1) we need to support entrepreneurs, not innovators; 2) good policies help businesses create customers, not jobs; and 3) we must help one another in our paths to success. I agree with him on all accounts.

So by now, if you’re still with me, you might be wondering how all this relates to sustainability. An excellent question.

WHY OUR CURRENT ECONOMIC MODEL IS NOT SUSTAINABLE

I’m not trying to fool anyone into thinking that I’m as intelligent or knowledgeable as Jim Clifton. I’m not. But I do have three beefs with our current economic model.

The idea of constant growth is flawed
It seems that everyone is always out for more growth. Businesses. Cities. Economies. Children. It’s a flawed concept. Sometimes growth just for growth’s sake is highly counter-productive. Should businesses always expect 5% growth every year? Is it always ideal for a city’s population to grow? The United Nations projects that the U.S. population growth rate will continue declining and will be just a hair above 0% by the end of the 21st century. If population growth slows to such a snail’s pace, can every city really expect to continue growing? Assuming that everything must constantly be growing ignores one of the most fundamental rules of the world: in order for growth to occur, we must have the resources necessary to support it. Resources are limited, folks, and at some point our growth might outpace how quickly natural resources are replenishing (if it hasn’t already).

The U.S. GDP relies too heavily on consumers and consumerism
Our nation’s economy is one that relies heavily on consumers to keep it afloat, and we do that by buying lots and lots of stuff. If we stop buying, the economy slows down dramatically. But that pace of consumption means that we’re always buying unnecessary stuff. In April 2011, the Commerce Department reported that American consumers spent an annualized $1.2 trillion on non-essential stuff. The unfortunate part is that, as I noted in a December post, buying all that stuff doesn’t make people happy. Experiences make them happy. And even worse, the environmental impacts of all that stuff are severe. The real question is whether or not we can keep our economy moving forward while buying less junk? I don’t have the answer but we need to figure it out.

GDP doesn’t equate to happiness or well-being
Gross Domestic Product represents the total dollar value of all the goods and services produced over a certain time period. While it’s the best measurement we have for the size of an economy, it doesn’t measure how well off a country is or their citizens’ well-being. Yes, it’s important to have at least enough income to life comfortably but having (and spending) more cash doesn’t translate to being happier. Turns out The Notorious B.I.G. was right when he crooned Mo Money Mo Problems. In fact, in the research paper, Would You Be Happier If You Were Richer?, the  authors reported that “although average life satisfaction in countries tends to rise with GDP per capita at low levels of income, there is little or no further increase in life satisfaction once GDP per capita exceeds $12,000″. Ours is $47,000. While we were at the 2011 Aspen Environment Form, we heard British economist Charles Seaford talk about the need to bag GDP and consider a different metric that measures the extent to which people flourish. Love it. And even better, it looks like he’s already working on it.

WRAPPING UP

Jim Clifton is spot on correct. If our economy isn’t the biggest, baddest thing in the world, we are at risk. We need to pay attention to what he’s saying and ensure that we don’t fall behind. We must also consider other factors rather than just GDP when determining if our nation is successful. I’m sure the world isn’t going to discontinue paying attention to GDP anytime soon, but maybe we ought to actually be working towards making people happy rather than filling their wallets so that they can buy more unfulfilling stuff.

AWARENESS + POSITIVE ATTIDUE ≠ BEHAVIOR CHANGE

It is a common misperception that simply informing people about why a specific pro-environmental behavior is important and fostering a positive attitude about the action will directly lead to engaging in and sustaining the behavior. Research has repeatedly shown that general awareness/knowledge and positive attitudes do not highly correlate with environmental behavior change. For example, employees frequently report that they feel it is important to conserve paper (i.e., have a positive attitude). They also claim that they are aware of the positive benefits of double-sided printing and that it’s an option at their workplace (i.e., are generally aware and knowledgeable). Yet, they still do not duplex print at work. But why is this?

As with any behavioral explanation, it depends on the situation and could entail a myriad of reasons. Assuming double-sided printing is available on all machines, it may be that people don’t know how to actually select duplex, and they want to avoid looking foolish or incompetent if they try and fail. People may also think that no one else in their department is duplexing so why should they do it, or they may perceive that their efforts really don’t make a difference given the total amount of paper used by the organization.

Regardless of the reason or combination of reasons, the aforementioned example demonstrates how many people often fail to adopt a pro-environmental behavior even if they see it is as important and are keenly aware of the benefits. This is not to say that generally educating people and trying to instill positive attitudes about environmentally-friendly behaviors are unimportant—these elements are definitely valuable. However, in conjunction with disseminating benefits information and promoting awareness about the behavior, it is critical to also include details and tactics that address human nature, social influence, and any perceived barriers connected to the targeted action.

TIPS FOR INCREASING THE LIKELIHOOD OF BEHAVIOR CHANGE

There are multiple strategies that can be employed and details to consider when trying to promote and sustain behavior change. Having said this, I’d love to talk about them all (yes, I am a behavior nerd). However, for the sake of this blog post, I will only highlight a few (five to be exact) that research has shown to be particularly effective and that take into consideration human nature and perception, as well as social influence.

1. Provide Clear Procedural Instructions: Lack of “how-to” knowledge tends to be one of the most significant barriers for people who are generally willing to engage in a specific pro-environmental activity. Regardless of how motivated people are to perform a given behavior, they typically will refrain from trying it out if the process to complete the action is not clear. In light of this, it’s important to always provide clear procedural steps about how to complete the behavior even if the action appears to be relatively simple.  For example, with the double-sided printing situation discussed earlier, it would be beneficial to post step-by-step instructions on how to select duplex copying near all of the applicable copiers.

2. Model the Behavior: In addition to providing static “how-to” instructions, it can also be beneficial to have someone demonstrate the actual behavior. People are typically more willing to try something when they observe someone else do it first and can subsequently test out the behavior at their own pace and in a “safe” environment where they won’t feel publicly embarrassed if they fumble in their attempts. Video recording someone going through the steps of completing the behavior and making the file accessible online for people to independently view at their leisure is often an effective approach. Referencing the duplex example again, an IT person could video record someone going through the on-screen motions of selecting double-sided printing on their computer. Following promotional efforts that note the availability of the video online, an employee could then access and view the video via his or her own work computer, rewinding as necessary to catch each step.

3. Communicate the Norm: Even though individuals are generally unaware of it, they are strongly influenced by what the majority of people around them are doing or what is perceived to be common behavior. Considering this, if a survey or structured observation indicates that a targeted behavior is generally supported or exhibited by a majority of people in an organization, it is highly beneficial to incorporate this fact into all educational efforts. Communicating this “norm” will strongly influence people who are not engaging in the behavior; the more these individuals perceive themselves as not being a part of the majority, the greater the probability that they will adopt the behavior. Granted, there is a caveat with this behavioral tip. If less than half of the group supports or demonstrates the target behavior, do not advertise this since it will often have a counterproductive effect. This strategy is more about capturing the remaining few that are still not engaging in a targeted behavior versus trying to promote a behavior that is only exhibited by a small minority.

We recently worked with The Nebraska Medical Center (TNMC) to incorporate this strategy into the organization’s Lights Off campaign, which was focused on motivating people to shut off the lights when leaving unoccupied rooms and workspaces. Based on an initial survey of the organization, we found that an overwhelming majority of employee respondents agreed that it was important to save energy at work by shutting off the lights. This “normative fact” was then incorporated into TNMC’s promotional efforts. Mixed with other strategies, such as placing reminder stickers above light switch plates, this approach of communicating the norm helped significantly increase the percentage of employees who regularly shut off the lights.

4. Leverage the Consistency Principle: Generally speaking, people like to act in a consistent manner. Keeping this in mind, it can be very beneficial to ask people to sign some type of informal pledge form indicating that they will engage in the targeted behavior. By signing a pledge and demonstrating an initial level of commitment, there is a good chance people will actually follow through with the behavior due to a general tendency to be consistent with what they have previously promised to do. To further increase accountability and the likelihood of follow through, it’s also advantageous to publicize the names of pledgees in some fashion (assuming you receive their permission). Periodically thanking them for agreeing to engage in the behavior can also help serve as reminder of their commitment, increasing the likelihood that they will follow through and continue engaging in the behavior.

We leverage this consistency principle by creating an online pledge tool for our clients. This tool allows people to select and commit to a few simple pro-environmental behaviors. The name of each pledgee is then placed on a digital wall of honor and grouped with other departmental colleagues who completed the pledge. Automated emails are also periodically sent out to pledgees thanking them for their participation and tactfully reminding them of their commitment to engage in their selected behaviors. An example of this online pledge tool and the wall of honor can be viewed on the University of Nebraska Medical Center’s green team website, entitled UNMC LiveGreen.

5. Provide Feedback: People inherently like to know how well they are doing at something and feel successful. Consequently, providing consistent feedback about progress and advertising the collective impact of people’s efforts can be incredibly beneficial in motivating and sustaining behavior change. In fact, providing individual and/or group feedback is often more effective at sustaining pro-environmental behavior change than providing incentives—a topic I plan to discuss in more depth in my next blog post (in a nutshell, incentives can be great at inciting behavior change, but they often stink at maintaining it).

To view an example of a feedback mechanism that we use with our clients, check out the Omaha Public Schools’ (OPS) tracker tool on the OPS Green Schools Initiative website.  This feedback tool helps OPS visually demonstrate the district’s progress toward its sustainability goals, such as increasing the district-wide ENERGY STAR rating and reducing the total amount of waste produced. Feedback is also provided at the individual school level via quarterly snapshot sheets that are provided to each school, highlighting the progress they’ve each made toward OPS’ overall sustainability goals. As a result of integrating school-specific and district-wide feedback mechanisms with other behavioral strategies, OPS has been able to significantly reduce the amount of energy and resources that the district consumes.

HARNESSING BEHAVIORAL INERTIA & MIXING STRATEGIES

As noted previously, changing behavior is hard. Sometimes really hard. However, this can be viewed as a positive (I realize you may think I’m crazy at this point). If we can get people to change, they will often maintain that change simply due to behavioral inertia—their innate tendency to keep on acting in the same way. In essence, once they make the change, their natural inclination to remain consistent can set in. To promote this initial change and set the stage for maintaining the behavior (i.e., behavioral inertia), it is important to keep in mind that basic information and awareness campaigns are often insufficient at provoking and sustaining behavior change. People typically will not change simply because they are aware of the benefits of the behavior and generally have a positive attitude about it.  In light of this, promotional and educational efforts should incorporate research-supported strategies that take into account social influence and human nature and perception. However, even with some of the more effective strategies that I’ve mentioned, incorporating just one additional strategy is often not enough. Integrating several of these strategies tends to produce the best results and increase the likelihood that people will not only make the change, but also sustain it—the true goal of any campaign focused on promoting environmentally-friendly behaviors.